Appendices O-Q - Environmental Report Marsland Expansion Area. · The following protocol is a...
34
Appendices O - Q
Transcript of Appendices O-Q - Environmental Report Marsland Expansion Area. · The following protocol is a...
Appendices
O - Q
CROW BUTTE RESOURCES, INC. Swift Fox Survey Protocol Marsland Expansion Area
1
Appendix O Swift Fox Survey Protocol
The following protocol is a modification of a swift fox protocol included in Mineral Exploration Permit Number NE0210824 (dated August 19, 2009) issued by the Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) to Crow Butte Resources, Inc (NDEQ 2009). This permit primarily addresses impacts associated with drilling of boreholes for purposes of mineral exploration. The primary modification of the Appendix 10 protocol is expanding the type of activities potentially impacting the swift fox to include, in addition to drilling of boreholes, uranium in situ satellite project development activities. Satellite “project development” includes construction of satellite facilities (process building and associated storage structures, evaporation ponds, wellfield development (surface preparation, monitor and injection/recovery wells, wellhouses, and trunklines/piping), well workover, boreholes outside of wellfields, and project roadways. Reference to “project development” in this protocol refers to these activities. Project development activities apply to initial construction/wellfield development, operations and decommissioning. Decommissioning includes decontaminating, dismantling, and removing satellite facilities and associated wellfield buildings/equipment/wells and, site reclamation and groundwater restoration.
Swift fox are typically found in topographically flat (slopes <20%) arid regions. In Nebraska, suitable habitat is in the short-grass prairie ecoregion where vegetation is less than 40 cm tall. They can be found in large expanses of prairie as well as prairie intermixed with agriculture. Dens are also found in anthropogenic areas such as near roads and trails, and in agricultural fields, culverts pipes and buildings (Tannerfeldt et al 2003). Swift fox are highly mobile and will use a variety of dens throughout the year. However, a female swift fox with young pups will typically be tied to one den until the pups are old enough to disperse from the den. Swift fox den entrances have a diameter of 17 to 23 cm.
Required Surveys: CBR will avoid impacting the swift fox species by avoiding certain locations during specific times of the year. Surveys shall be conducted that are consistent with the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NG&PC) standard protocol included in CBR’s Mineral Exploration Permit Number NE0210824 as Attachment 1.
The survey form to be used for swift fox surveys is attached to this protocol.
Project development activities will occur within a designated permit boundary. If project development activities within this permit boundary are such that specific protocol requirements (e.g., designated distances from swift fox dens) cannot be avoided as stated in this protocol, CBR will consult with the NDEQ and NG&PC as to the feasibility of
CROW BUTTE RESOURCES, INC. Swift Fox Survey Protocol Marsland Expansion Area
2
alternate actions. No work will be conducted until any such issue has been resolved with the NDEQ and NG&PC.
Surveyors: Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified individual who has experience working with the species or has been trained to identify swift fox burrows, dens and sign (scat, tracks, etc.).
Location: Surveys shall be conducted at project development sites discussed above where suitable habitat is present within the range of the species.
Season: Surveys shall be conducted year-around in areas of suitable habitat where project development activities are planned.
Timing: Surveys shall be conducted within one week of initiating project development activities described above under Location.
Survey Technique: The “denning season” is defined as the period of time when adult swift fox give birth and raise pups. In Nebraska, the swift fox denning season is from April 1 through August 31.
During the denning season, the area that must be surveyed for dens includes project development activities plus an additional 230 meters around the affected areas. When developing wellfields, numerous boreholes will initially be drilled. In this situation, the “affected area” will be the perimeter of the wellfield for the addition of 230 meters to the survey area, as opposed to each drill site. Under such conditions (i.e. work over multiple days or months), only one survey shall be submitted for that period indicating the duration of planned activities in the survey area. During other periods of time (e.g., operations), when individual boreholes are drilled at one time or a workover rig is used for well maintenance, then the additional 230 meters will be applied to the drill site. The above procedures will allow the operator the option of the most effective type of survey to use - wellfield boundary or individual drill site. The satellite facilities will be located within a 1.8-acre fenced-in site. The swift fox survey will be conducted prior to construction using an additional 230 meters around the fence boundary.
During the non-denning season (September 1 through March 31), the area that must be surveyed for dens includes the project development activities plus an additional 100 meters around the affected areas. When developing wellfields, numerous boreholes will initially be drilled. In this situation, the “affected area” will be the perimeter of the
CROW BUTTE RESOURCES, INC. Swift Fox Survey Protocol Marsland Expansion Area
3
wellfield for the addition of 100 meters to the survey area, as opposed to each drill site. Under such conditions (i.e. work over multiple days or months), only one survey shall be submitted for that period indicating the duration of planned activities in the survey area. During other periods of time (e.g., operations), when individual boreholes are drilled at one time or a workover rig is used for well maintenance, then the additional 100 meters will be applied to the drill site. The above procedures will allow the operator the option of the most effective type of survey to use - wellfield boundary or individual drill site. The satellite facilities will be located within a 1.8-acre fenced-in site. The swift fox survey will be conducted using an additional 100 meters around the fence boundary.
The survey will consist of walking transects and searching for dens within the survey area. Transects will be no more that 50 meters apart in order to thoroughly cover the area.
An active den may have fresh digging at the entrance, although this is not always the case (Jackson and Choate 2000). Sign, such as scat or tracks, can also be indicate an active den. Swift fox tracks are approximately 2.54 cm wide and 3.8 cm long. Although this is the smallest canid species, tracks can be confused with other species, especially young coyotes. Inactive dens may be overgrown with vegetation, have spider webs over the entrance, or be caving in.
Conservative Measures: If a potentially active swift fox den is identified, one of two conservation measures should be implemented:
1. The area of project development activities shall be done so activities are at least 230 meters from the den during the denning season, or 100 meters from the den during the non-denning season. For drilling sites, these can be moved to an appropriate distance from the den. A survey around any of these new activities must be conducted.
2. A track or scent station can be set up to determine if the den is being used by swift fox. If track or scent stations indicate swift fox are using the den, then project development activities within a minimum of 100 meters or 230 meters (whichever is appropriate for the season) of the den would be postponed until the den is abandoned. For drilling sites, they can be moved as outlined in #1 above. If track or scent stations indicate swift fox are not using the den, then drilling activities may proceed if there are not any other dens or swift fox within the survey area.
Track Station: Den use can be determined by clearing vegetation around the den and sifting a mixture of fine dry sand and unscented glycerin in a circular patter (~1 m in diameter) around the den hole, approximately 0.5 inches thick. Tracks of the animal using the den can then be identified the following morning as most animals using underground dens are nocturnal and will exit the den at night. Track stations are only
CROW BUTTE RESOURCES, INC. Swift Fox Survey Protocol Marsland Expansion Area
4
good for one night. If the track station cannot be checked the following morning, a new sand and glycerin mixture should be applied to the area around the den hole and surveyed the next morning.
Scent Station: Swift fox scent station surveys can be conducted any time of the year, although tracks will not show on bare, frozen ground. However, snow can be used as a tracking medium in winter. Scent stations are created by clearing any vegetation in an area and sifting a mixture of fine dry sand and unscented glycerin in a circular patter (~1 m in diameter) approximately 0.5 inches thick. A plaster tablet soaked in cod/salmon oil mixture (or either) is placed in the center of the station. Scent stations are then placed at locations selected based on the suitability of the surrounding habitat and the presence of certain structures (fence rows, gates, intersections, trails, etc.) that facilitate movement. Weather permitting, they are reset for 3 consecutive days or until at least one station shows sign of swift fox visitation (tracks, feces). Scent stations should not be used within 300 meters of a known or suspected active den as these methods may attract predators.
Survey Reports A monthly survey report shall be submitted to Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NG&PC) and Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) describing all surveys for the swift fox that were conducted during the previous month in connection with project development activities. The survey report shall include the names of the surveyors and their credentials, date and time of the survey, weather conditions, locations surveyed, methods, results, and a discussion of applicable conservation measures implemented. If the swift fox is not identified, the above information must be recorded and included in the report to be submitted at the end of the month. If a swift fox is identified within the survey area, NG&PC must be notified by telephone within twenty-four (24) hours of identification. Written documentation of identification and the survey report shall be submitted with five (5) days of species identification, along with indication of conservation measures. All survey reports shall be submitted no later than the 28th day of the month following the end of the reporting period, even if the species being surveyed are not detected at a particular site. Copies of the reports shall be kept on site for inspection by the NDEQ.
References: Jackson, V.I. and J.R. Chaote. 2000. Dens and den sites of the swift fox, Vulpes velox.
The Southwestern Naturalist 45(2):212:220).
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ). 2009. Mineral Exploration Permit Number NE0210824. August 19, 2009.
Tannerfeldt, M., A. Moehrenschlager and A. Angerbjorn. 2003. Den ecology of swift, kit, and arctic foxes. A review. In the Swift Fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world, M. Sovada and L. Carbyn editors. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regima.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Report Surveyor’ Name(s)______________________________________________________
Credentials: (e.g., who certified the surveyor and date of certification or surveyor’s knowledge of surveyed species) __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
Date of Survey: ______________________ Time of Survey: ______________________ Weather Condition: Temperature: ________oF Wind Speed & Direction: _____________________ Other
Sunny Partly Cloudy Cloudy Snowing Raining _____________ Legal Location or GPS coordinates (Lat/Long or UTM) of survey area (include datum, i.e., NAD83, WGS84:____________________________________________________ County: _______________________ Vegetative Cover (i.e. corn stubble, plowed field, wetland, short grass prairie 10-20 cm tall Methods used to survey affected area (.i.e. Mountain Plover Survey Protocol, 5 transects 50 ft apart) _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Were any of the following species identified in the area? Mountain Plover Yes/No
River Otter Yes/No Swift Fox Yes/No
If so, what conservation measures were taken? (Attach if necessary) ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ If species is identified, record the location of the species in GPS coordinates. Also indicate locational certainty (i.e. 3 birds were flushed 50 yards NW from this point). Photographs may be sent with survey reports to aid in site description and species identification.
Submit survey reports monthly to: Nebraska Game & Parks Commission Nebraska Dept. of Env. Quality Attn: Env. Analyst Supervisor Attn: Mineral Exploration Program Nebraska Natural Heritage Program P.O. Box 98922 2200 N 33rd Street Lincoln, NE 68509 Lincoln, NE 68503
August 2009
Table P.1-1 Primary Assumptions Serving as the basis for Surety Cost EstimatesAssociated with Restoration and Reclamation of One (1) Mine Unit
Assumptions QuantityTotal number of production wellsTotal number of injection wellsTotal number of shallow monitor wellsTotal number of perimeter wellsTotal number of restoration wellsWellfield Area (ft2)Wellfield Area (acres)Affected Ore Zone Area (ft2)Average Completed Thickness (ft)PorosityAffected Volume (ft3)Flare FactorK gallons per Pore VolumeNumber of Patterns in Unit(s)Estimated Number of Pore Volumes for RestorationNumber of Wells per WellfieldTotal Number of WellsAverage Well Depth (ft) - Deep WellsAverage Well Depth (ft) - Shallow Depth
Revised 6/11/2013Estimated costs are summarized in Table P. 1-2*Number of wells per wellhouse typically 4 wellhouses per wellfield
120*2000*
41110
588,00013.5
588,00019.60.29
11,524,8001.2
30,000120II
345345
1,100400
Table P.1-2 Marsland Total Restoration and Reclamation Cost Estimate - 2013 Surely Estimate
Task Cost $
I. Groundwater Restoration (Sheets 3 to 6)
II. Wellfield Reclamation (Sheets 7 to 10)
il. Commercial Plant Reclamation/Decommissioning (Sheets 1 Ito 14)
IV. Miscellaneous Site Reclamation (Sheets 19 to 21)
V. Deep Disposal Well Reclamation (Sheet 22)
Subtotal Reclamation and Restoration Cost Estimate
Contract Administratioi 10%
Contingency 15%
TOTAL RECLAMATION AND RESTORATION COST ESTIMATE
Revised 6/11/2013
$233,160
$628,175
$757,896
$142,493
$67,593
$1,829,317
$182,932
$274,398
$2,286,647
TFable I).1-3 Marsland Ground Water Restoration -2013 Surety EstimateTask MUl NILJ2 MU3 NIU4 N1U5 NMU6 NM.17 NIU8 MIU9 11UI0 MUll Total
I. IX Treatment Costs
PV's Required
Total Kgals for Treatment
IX Treatment Unit Cost ($/Kgal)
Subtotal IX Treatment Costs per Wellfield
Total IX Treatment Costs
II. Reverse Osmosis Costs
PV's Required
Total Kgals tor Treatment
Reverse Osmosis Unit Cost ($/Kgal)
Subtotal Reverse Osmosis Costs per Wellfield
Total Reverse Osmosis Costs
Ill. Recirculation Costs
PV's Required
Total Kgals for Treatment
Recirculation Unit Cost ($/Kgall
Subtotal Recirculation Costs per Wellfield
Total Recirculation Costs
(Sheet 25)
(Sheet 26)
3
90000
$0.40
$36,000.00
$36,000.00
6
180000
$1.48
$266,400.00
$266,400.00
2
60000
$0.31
$18,600.00
$18,600.00
7.35
$32,235.72
$32,235.72
$32,235.72
3 3 3 3
0 0 0 0
$0.40 $0.40 $0.40 $0 40
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
6 6 6 6
0 0 0 0
$1.48 $1.48 $1 48 $1 48
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
2 2 2 2
0 0 ) 0
$0.31 $0.31 $0.31 $0.31
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
3 3 3
0 0 0
$0 40 $0.40 $0.40
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
3
0
$0 40
$0.00
3
0
$0.40
$0.00
3
0
$0.40
$0.00 $0.00
6 6 6 6
0 0 0 0
$1.45 $1.48 $1.48 $1 4S
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
6
0
$1.48
$0.00
6
0
$1.48
$0.00
0
$1.48
$0.00
2 2 2
0 0 0
$0.31 $0.31 $0.31
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
2
0
$0.31
$0.00
2
0
$0.31
$0.00
0
$0.31
$0.00
(Sheet 27)
0
$0.31
$0.00
i,. Consumables
Spare parts, filters and consuinables = $52,629.75 year
Active restoration period (months)
Consumable usage (months restoration x annual rate estimate)
Subtotal Consumables per Mine Unit
Total Consumables Costs
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
$000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $000
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
0.00 0 00 0.00
$0024 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
000
$0.01)
Table P.1-3 Marsland Ground Water Restoration -2013 Surety Estimate, ContinuedTask MUI NIU2 NIU3 Nt14 NIl5 NML16 N1L17 NItl8 NII19 NLtIO NItlIl T'otal
V. Monitoring and Samlpling Costs
Guideline 8 analysis =
6 parameter in-house analysis =
Total restoration wells
Total monior wells
IX Treatmtent duration Imontlis)
Reverse Osmosis duration (months)
Recirculation duration Imonths)
Stabilization duration (montls)
$248 00 analysis
$50.85 analysis
10
25
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
2.05
4.11
1.19
12
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 It 00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.00
000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
12 12 12 12 12 12 12
0 0o
0 00
0.00
12
0.00
0.00
0.00
12
0.00
0.00
0.00
12
0 00
0 00
0.00
A. Restoration Well Sampling
1. Well Sampling prior to restoration start
# of Wells
S/sample
2. IX Treatmient Sainpling
0 of Wells
Total 0 saimples
$/sample
3. RO Sampling
0 of Wells
Total 0 samples
S/samiple
4. Recirculation Sampling
H of Wells
Total 8 samples
$/saniple
5. Stabilization Sampling (Guideline 8)
0 of Wells
Total 0 samples
S/sample
6 Stabilization Sampling (6 parameter in-house)
0 of Wells
Total 0 samples
$/santple
7. Monitor Well Sampling
0 of' Wells
S/sample
Total fl samples (2.2/mo for entire period)
10
$248.00
10
30
$50.85
10
40
$50 85
to
20
$248.00
10
120
$248.00
10
120
$50.85
25
$50.85
1064
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$50 85 $5085 $5085 $50.85 $5085 $50.85 $50.85
0
0
$50.85
0
0
$50.85
0 0
0 0
$50.85 $50.85
0 0
0 0
$50.85 $50.85
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$248.00 $24800 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248 00 $248.00 $248.00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00 $248.00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$50 85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $5085 $50.85 $50.85
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$50 85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85 $50.85
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
$50.85
0 0
0 0
$5085 $50 85
0 0 0
$50.85 $50 85 $50.85
0 0 0
Table P.l-3 Marsland Ground Water Restoration -2013 Surety Estimate, ContinuedTask NI II NIU2 NIU3 't-14 NILt5 M116 NILJ7 NIMJ8 N.119 MUlI0 MLIII Total
8. Other Laboratory Costs
Radon, urinalysis, etc. =
Total fbr Other Laboratory Costs:
Subtolal Monitoring and Sampling Costs per Mine Unit
Total Monitoring and Sampling Costs
VI. MIT Costs
MIT Costs per Well
Restoration period, plus stabilization
Remaining MIT's per 5 year cycle
Nuttber of Wells MI'nd for Life of Mine Unit
Subtotal MIT Mine Unit
$940.73 month
$6,914.37
$107,880.27
$107,880.27
$93.53
19.35
345
$32,267.85
$000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$93.53 $93.53 $93.53 $93.53 $93.53 $93.53 $93.53
12.00 12.00 1200 1200 1200 12.00 12.00
1 I I I 2 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$93.53
12.00
3
0
$0.00
$93.53
12 00
3
0
$0.00
$93.53
12 00
3S0
$0.00
5-year MIT Costs for Disposal Wells
Nutmhber of DDWs
Number of MITs per DDW
Subtotal MIT DDWN' Costs
Total MIT Costs
VI. Sapervisory Labor Cost
Engineer Supplrl =
IIP Technician support =
$6,425
$6,425
$6,425
$8,042 77 month
$4,553.62 ttotntlh
Active restoration period (tronltls)
Stabilization period (ttonths)
7.35
12
I Engineer support during active restoration
2 lIP Terhtnician support during active restoration
3 Engineer support during final stabilization
4 HP Technician support during final stabilization
5 Cost reduction due to concurrent restoration of Mine Units
Subtotal Supersisory Labor per Mine Unit
Total Supervisory Labor Costs
$59,114.36
$33,469.11
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000
12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$96,513.24 $96,513 24 $)06,513.24 $289,539.72
$54,643 44 $54.643.44 $54.643.44 $163.930 32
000 0 00 0.00 0.00 0 00 -75,578 34 -75,578.34 -75,578.34 -$226,735.02
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75,578.34 $75,578.34 $75,578.34 $226,735.02
735.02
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75,578.34 $75,578.34 $75,578.34 $226,735.02
$92,583.47
$243,740.15 $226,
TOTAL RESTORATION COST PER $ELLFIELD$553,699.46
TlOTAL GROUND WATER RESTORATION COSTS $233,160.02Kl=NtIJ thtnvOu
Rt,j,v t,I 61112013
Table P.1-4 Ndarsland Welifield Reclaniation - 20113 Surety Estimate]%111 MtU2 RiIJ3 NAU4 MIJS $1146 $1147 $114 MU9 511410 Mull Totals
Welllield Piping
Assumptions:Number of WellhousesTotal Mine Unit surface area (acres)Tota) lenglh of'sinall diameter productron and itjection lines (later,Total length of 3/8-inch hose (ft)Total length I-l/4-mnch stinger pipe (I)Total length of 2-inch downhole production pipe (1i1Total Length of Trunkline (6-inch) (fi)Total Length of TrUnkline (8-inch) (ftiTotal Length ofTrunkline (10-inch) (i61Total Length ofTrunkline (I 2-inch) (fi)Total Length ofAII Trunklint (ft)Tota) number of production wellsTotal numher of injection ws'ellsTotal number of shallow rtonitor wellsTotal number of perimeter ttonitor wells
1. Production and Injection PipingA. Removal and Loading
Production and Injection Piping Removal Unit Cost(Sift of pipe)
Subtotal Production and Itjeclion Piping Removal andB. Ptpe Shredding
Production and Injection Piping Shredding Unit Cost(Sift of pipe)
Subtotal Production and Injection Piping Removal and Loading C,C. Equipment Costs
Cat 924G Loader Unit Costs for removal (450/day)Shredder Unit Costs for shredding (450-/day)
Subtotal Equipment CostiD. Transport and Disposal Costs (NRC-Licensed Facility)
Chipped Volume Reduction (ftt/lilCltpped Volume per Welfield (yd')Volume for Disposal Assuming 25% Void Space (yd')
Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd')Unpackaged Bulk
Subtotal Production and Injection Piping Transport andDisposal Costs
Total Production and Injection Piping Cosis
413.50
0
0
4800
4000
17600
21600
120
200
14
I1
0000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000
0
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
000000
00.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
00.00
0
00
0
0
00
000
0
0
0oo
0
0
0
0
0
0
u
0o
0
0
0
0
0 0o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
0 00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
13.50
0
0
0
4800
4000
17600
0
0
21600
120
200
14
1i
$0.88 $0 88 $0.88 $0 88 $0.88 $5 88 $088 $0.88 $0 88 $0.88 S0.88
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 S$.00
$0.10 $0.10 s0 10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 S0.10
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 S000 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00 SOrb $000 $0.00 $0.00 SO.t) $0.00 SO.O0 $0.00 $00r
$0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 80.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $O0 $0.00
S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $000
0.0069 0.0009 0 0069 0 0069 0 0069 0.0069 0.0069 0.0009 0.000 0.0069 0.0009
00 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 00 00 0.0 00 00
0.0 0.0 00 00 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0
$221.64 $221.64 $221.64 $221.64 $221.04 $221.64 $221.64 $221.64 $221.o4 $22 I.04 $221.64
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $o.00 S0.00 so.00 s0 00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00
$8.88 $8.88 58.00 $o.o8 so.88 $8.00 $o.88 $8.80 So.oo $8.88 $8.80
$0.00
$0.00
$000
00
$0.00
$0.00
Table P.1-4 Marsland Wellfield Reclamationi - 2013 Surety Estimate, Continued
MNIUI M12 IlMU3 5MU4 MU U5 NIlU6 N1U7 1US MlU9 MUl10 MU I I Totals
II. TruIldmines
A. Reriroval and Loading
Trunkline Removal Unit Cost ($/ft of pipe)
Subtotal Tirukline Removal and Loading Costs
B. Pipe Shredding
frunkline Shredding Unit Cost (S/ft of pipe)
Subtotal Trunldine Shredding Costs
C. Equipment Costs
Cat 9124G Loader Unit Costs for removal (200/day)
Shredder Unit Costs for shredding (200/day)
Sublutal Equipmentl Costs
D. Transport and Disposal Costs INRC-Licensed Facility)
Chipped Volume Reduction (6-inch) (it'/0)
Chipped Volume Redaction IS-inch)l If'/ft)
Chipped Volume Reduction (I O-inch) (f•l/fi)
Chipped Volume Redaction (12-inch) ((t'/f1
Chipped Volume per Wellfield (ydi)
Volume lbr Disposal Assuating 25% Void Space (fit)
Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/Sft
)
Subtotal Transport and Disposal Costs
Total Trunkline Costs
Ill. Dowlhole Pipe
A. Reriosal and Loading
Doscnhlole Piping Removal Unit Cost $/hf oflrpe)
Dos..nhole Ilosing Reiroval Unit Cost iS/l otfpipel
Removal of t-I/4-inch stinger pipe
Removal of downhole production pipe
Renmosal ofdowvnlhole hose
Subtotal Downhole Piping Removal and Loading Costs
B Pipe Shredding
Dowirlole Piping Shredding Unit Cost (SIft of pipe)
Subtotal Downhole Piping Shredding Costs
C. Equipment Costs
Siteal Unit Costs for removal
Shredder Unit Costs for shredding
Subtotal Equipnment Costs
D. Transport and Disposal Costs (NRC-Licensed Facility)
Chipped Volume Rediction - I - I/4-inch stinger (11'/fl)
Chipped Volume Rediction - 2-inch dosnlhole
production lfl)
Volunie Reduction - 3/8-inch hose (03/0)
Chipped Volume - I-I//4-inch stinger (ft')
Chipped Volume - 2-inch do-,liole production (ft)
Voluime 3/8-inch hose (113)
Voluire for Disposal Assuming 25% Void Space (yd')
Fransportalion and Disposal Unit Cost (S/yd I)
(Unipackaged Bilk)
Subtotal Downhole Piping Transport and Dtispsosal CostsTotal Dowsnhole Piping Costs
$1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 $1 99 $1.99
S42.984.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $42.084.0t)
$1 9) $1.99 $1.99 $1.99 SI.99 $1 99 $1 99 $1 99 $1.99 $1.99 $1.99
$42.084.00 $0.00 $000 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $000 $0.00 $000 $0 0o $42,9804.00
$157.757.76 $0.00 $000 $000 SO.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00
$6,920.64 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SO.00
$164,673.40 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 S.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1o4.678.40
0.0651 0.0651 0.0651 0.0601 0.065) 00605 0.0651 0.0651 00651 0 0651 0.0651
0.1103 0.1103 0 1103 0.1103 0.1103 0.1103 0.1103 0.1103 0.1103 0 1103 0.1103
0.1712 0.1712 0 1712 0 1712 0.1712 0.1712 0.1712 0.1712 0.1712 0.1712 0 1712
0.2408 0.2408 02408 02408 0.2408 0.240S 0.2408 0.240t 0.240S 02408 0.2408
81.5 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 00 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
101.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 00 00 00 0.0 0.0 101.9
$221.64 $221.64 $221.64 $221.64 S221.64 $221 64 $221 64 $221 64 $221.64 $221.64 $221.04
$22.585.12 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 $000 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $22,585.12
$273,231.52 $0.01) $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8.00 $273,231.52
$0.100 $0.100 $0.10o $0S 100 $0.100 $0.100 $0.100 S0.100 $0.100 $0.100
$0.200 $0200 $0.200 $0200 $0.200 $0.200 $0.200 $0.200 $0.200 $0.200 $0.200
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$480100 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
$000 $0.00 $000 $13.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00
$480 00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0100 $0.00 $0.00 $000 S480.00
$0 090 SO 090 $0090 $0 090 $0090 00.090 $0.090 $0.090 $0.090 $0.090 $0.090
$432.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $432.00
$336.51 $0.00 $000 S000 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0100 $0.00
$68.35 $5.00 $1000 $000 $500 $0000 $000 $000 $0.00 $000 $0100
$404.86 $0.00 $0.00 s0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0100 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $404.8o
0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0 0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044
0.0074 0.0074 0.0074 0 0074 0.0074 0 0074 0.0074 0.0074 0.0074 0 0074 0 0074
0.0313 00313 00313 0.0313 0.0313 0.0313 0.0313 0.0313 0.0313 00313 00313
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 7 0.0 0.0 00 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 1.7
$221.64 $221.64 $221 64 $221.04 $221.64 $221 64 $221.64 $221.64 $221 b4 $221.64 $221.64
$376.79 00.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 S376.70
$1,693.65 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 80.00 $0.00 $0.00 00.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,693.65
Table P.1-4 Niarslaiid Wellfield Reclamation - 2013 Surety Estimate, ContinuedMUI 51U2 511%3 %114 511U5 MIU6 N11J7 51118 N1U9 UI10 M11llI Totals
IV. Surface ReclamationA. Remooval and disposal of contaminated soil around wells
Volumne of contaiiiinated soil (0.37 yd3 per injectionand production wvell) 118.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 (100 0 0.00 0 11S.40Disposal of contaminated soil $250.05 per yd3 $29.605 92 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $29,605.92Equipmnent (Cat 924G loader at 2 yd3hr) $10,809.33 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Labor (I man-hour per 2 Yd3) $1.473.27 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Subtotal removal aid disposal of conlarninaled soil $41,888.52 $000 $0.00 $0S00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $41,888.52
B. Recontour and seedingRecontour and seeding (est. $300/acre) $4.050.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Subtotal Recontour and Seeding $4,050.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $4,050.00
Total Surface Reclamation $45,938.52 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $45,938.52
IV. Well HlousesTotal Quantity 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Average Well House Weight (Lbs.) (Includes wellheadcovets for each well) 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200 9200A. Rerosat
Disinantlenienr at 2--man-days per wellhouse (nian-days) 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Dismanotlerent Labor Costs $1.502 72 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $1,502.72Equipment (Cat 924G at 2 hours per wellhouse) (his) 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Equipsent Costs $1.460.72 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $0.00 $0 00 $000 1,400672
Subtotal %ell Ilouse Disutantentent Costs $3,053.44 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,053.44B. Disposal
Total Disposal Weight (9200 lbs per wellhoUse) (Lbs) 36800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Subtotal Disposal Costs $1,104.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $000 $6".00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $11.00 $1,104 00
Total WVell Ilouse Remosal and Disposal Costs $4,157.44 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 80.00 S0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,157.44
TOlAL REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL COSIS PERWELLIFIELD $325,021.13 $0.00 $0.00 80.00 $0.00 00.00 80.00 S0.00 $0.01) $0.00 $0.00 $325,021.13
TOTAL WVELLFIELD BUILDINGS AND EQUIPMENT$REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL COSTS $325,021.13
Nil . N1w ý lhýI
0k, -d 6cI 1121ý 13
Table P.1-5 NIarsland Well Abandonment - 2013 Surety Estimale
MU I MU2 NJ [13 MU4 MLIt MNIU M17 ARMU MU9 MUlI MUll Twtt
I WcI Abandonment (Wellfields)0 of PtodUCtion Wells0 of lojection Wells
1 of Perimreter Monitoring WellsSof Shallow Monitoring Wells
Total Numober of Deep WellsTotal Number of Shallow WellsAverage Diameter of Casing (inches)Production, Injection and Perimeter Well Average Depth (11)Shallow Well Average Depth (fi)Total Mine Unit Well Depth 4ii)Well Abandonnment Unil Cost (/f1. of well)
Sultotal Abandonmenl Cost per Wellfield
120 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0331 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 331
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 51100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 0 0 900400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 0 0 327
3u9700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 309700
$0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82 $0.82
5303,154.00 $0.00 S0.00 $0.00 0 $10.00 $0.80 80.08 $0.010 0.00 SO.00 $3036,154.00
0.0221 64
50.00 $0.00
tntll I5.I 1110
II. Downhole Punip Disposal
Numnber of Downolte Punips
Puop Disposal Volumnelli3)Total Puatp Disposal Volutmelyd3)
Dovtnhole Pump Disposal Rate ($/yd3
)
Subtotal Downhale Puitp Disposal
00.50.0
$221 64
'r : 1 W l1rld Ab d t C !. S303 15400NIL] - M'-Uni'V.-d ,!I V2M.'
Table P.1-6 Marsland Satellite Facility Equipment Decommissioning -
2013 Surety Estimate
1. Removal and Loading CostsTankage
Number of Contaminated Tanks 10Volume of Contaminated Tank Construction Material (ft3) 193Number of Chemical Tanks 0Disposal Void Factor 1.25
A. Labor to Remove and Load TankageNumber of Persons 2Tanks/Day 1Number of Days 10S/Day/Person $199.09
Subtotal Removal Labor Costs $3.981.80B. Labor to Clean Chemical Tankage
Number of Persons ITanks/Day INumber of Days 0S/Day/Person $199.09
Subtotal Cleaning Labor Costs $0.00C. Equipment
Saws, scaffolding, etc. $6,000Subtotal Equipment Costs $6,000
Total Equipment Removal and Loading Costs S9,981.80
II. Transportation and Disposal Costs (NRC-Licensed Facility)A. Tankage
Volume of Tank Construction Material (fit) 193Volume for Disposal Assuming Void Space (yd-') 8.9Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd-') (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
Subtotal Tankage Transportation and Disposal Costs $1,972.60B. Contaminated PVC Pipe
Volume of Shredded PVC Pipe (fi') 153.6Volume for Disposal Assuming Void Space (yd3) 7.1Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd-) (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
Subtotal Contaminated PVC Pipe Transportation and Disposal Costs $1,573.64C. Pumps
Volume of Process Pumps (yd3 ) (no void factor used) 2.4Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd3) (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
Subtotal Pump Transportation and Disposal Costs $531.94D. Filters (injection, backwash and yellowcake filters)
Volume of Filters (yd 3 ) (no void factor used) 0.0Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd•) (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
Subtotal Filter Transportation and Disposal Costs $0.00E. Dryer
Dryer Volume (yd') (no void factor used) 0.0Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd3) (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
Subtotal Dryer Transportation and Disposal Costs $0.00Total Contaminated Equipment Transportation and Disposal Costs S4,078.18
Table P.1-6 Marsland Satellite Facility Equipment Decommissioning -2013 Surety Estimate, Continued
Ill. Transportation and Disposal (Solid Waste for Landfill Disposal)A. Cleaned Tankage
Volume of Tank Construction Material (ft ) 0Number of Landfill Trips ITransportation and Disposal Unit Cost (S/Load) $912.00
Subtotal Tankage Transportation and Disposal Costs S912.00B. Uncontaminated PVC Pipe
Volume of Shredded PVC Pipe (ft') 0Number of Landfill Trips ITransportation and Disposal Unit Cost (S/Load) $912.00
Subtotal PVC Pipe Transportation and Disposal Costs $912.00Total Uncontaminated Equipment Transportation and Disposal Costs $1,824.00
IV. Supervisory Labor Costs During Plant DecommissioningEstimated Duration (months) 6Engineer $48,256.62Radiation Technician $27,321.72
Total Supervisory Labor Costs S75,578.34
SUBTOTAL EQUIPMENT REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL COSTS PER FACILITY $91,462.32Building Area (Ft2) 34,000Building Equipment Removal and Disposal Cost per Square Foot $2.69
TOTAL EQUIPMENT REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL COSTS S91,462.32Revised 6il 1/2013
Table P.1-7 Marsland Building Demolition - 2013 Surety EstimateSatellite Plant
1. Decontamination CostsA. Wall Decontamination
Area to be Decontaminated (ft2) 30,000HC1 Application Rate (Gallons/ft2) I
HCI Acid Cost $1.54Subtotal Wall Decontamination Materials Costs $46,200.00
B. Concrete Floor DecontaminationArea to be Decontaminated (ft) 9000HCI Application Rate (Gallons/ft&) 2HCI Acid Cost $1.54
Subtotal Floor Decontamination Materials Costs $27,720.00C. Decontamination Labor
Labor (man-days)Subtotal Decontamination Labor Cost $398.18
D. Decontamination Equipment CostsSprayer pump $500Recycle pump $500Sprayer with hose $1,000
Subtotal Decontamination Equipment Costs $2,000E. Decontamination Waste Disposal (to Ponds)
Total gallons HCI waste 48,000Pumping costs (5 HP/30 gpm) $496.33
Subtotal Decontamination Costs $76,814.51Total Decontamination Costs $76,814.51
11. Demolition CostsAssumptions (based on 2007 costs):
Dismantling interior steel, tanks, pumps, etc. $198,800.00Dismantling plant building $99,400.00
A. Building DismantlingDismantle interior components (2007 $'s escalated by CPI) $202.179.60Plant building dismantling (2007 $'s escalated by CPI) $101,089.80
Subtotal Building Dismantling $303,269.40B. Concrete Floor Removal
Area of direct-dispose concrete floors (ft2) 13,400Removal Rate ($/ft2) $14.04
Subtotal Concrete Floor Removal $188,136.00Total Demolition Costs $491,405.40
Table P.1-7 Marsland Building Demolition - 2013 Surety Estimate, Continued
Il1. Disposal CostsA. Concrete Floor
Area of Direct-Dispose Concrete Floor (f12) 13,400Average Thickness of Concrete Floor (ft) 0.75Volume of Concrete Floor (ft3) 10,050Volume of Concrete Floor (Yd3) 372Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/Yd 3) (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
Subtotal Concrete Floor Disposal Costs S82,450.08Total Disposal Costs $82,450.08
IV Plant Site ReclamationA. Plant Site Earthwork
Material to be Moved (Yd3) 20.000D8N Bulldozer Earthwork Rate (Yd3/hr) 700D8N Hourly Rate $509.74
Subtotal Plant Site Earthwork $14,564.00
B. RevegetationArea requiring Revegetation (Ac) 4Revegetation Unit Cost ($/Ac) $300
Subtotal Plant Site Revegetation $1,200.00Total Plant Site Reclamation Costs $15,764.00
SUBTOTAL BUILDING DEMOLITION AND DISPOSAL COSTS $666,433.99Building Area (Ft2) 34,138Building Demolition Cost per Square Foot $19.52
TOTAL BUILDING DEMOLITION AND DISPOSAL COSTS $666,433.99
Revised 6/11/2013
Table P.1-8 Marsland Miscellaneous Site Reclamation - 2013 Surety Estimate
Access Road ReclamationAssumptions
Road Reclamation production rate (Yd3/hr) 200Length of Main Access Roads (ft) 500Average Main Access Road width (ft) 25Depth of Main Access Road Gravel Surface (ft) ISurface Area of Main Access Road (Ac) 0.3Length of Wellfield Access Roads (ft) 500Average Wellfield Access Road width (ft) 12Depth of Wellfield Access Road Gravel Surface (ft) 0.5Surface Area of Wellfield Road (Ac) 0.1
A. Main Access Road DirtworkMain Access Road Gravel Volume (Yd3) 463Total reclamation time (hrs) 2D8N Unit Operating Cost ($/hr) $509.74
Subtotal Main Access Road Gravel Roadbase Removal Costs $1,019.48
B. Wellfield Road DirtworkWellfield Road Gravel Volume (Yd3) )l1Total reclamation time (hrs) 1D8N Unit Operating Cost ($/hir) $509.74
Subtotal Wellfield Road Gravel Roadbase Removal Costs $509.74E. Discing/Seeding
AssumptionsSurface Area (acres) 0.4Discing/Seeding Unit Cost (S/acre) $300.00
Subtotal Discing/Seeding Costs $120.00Total Access Road Reclamation Costs $1,649.22
11. Wastewater Pipeline ReclamationAssumptions
Pipeline Removal Rate (ft./man-day) 67Pipeline Shredding Rate (ft./man-day) 1,500Number of Pond Pipelines 2Length of Pond Pipelines (ft) 2,000Average Pipe Size (Sch 40) 4
A. Pipeline Removal CostsLength of Pipelines (ft) 4,000Removal Rate (ft/man-day) 67Removal Labor Rate (S/man-day) $199.09Cat 924G Loader Use (days) 60Cat 924G Loader Cost $87,643.20
Subtotal Pipeline Removal Costs $99,588.60B. Pipeline Shredding Costs
Length of Pipelines (ft) 4,000Shredding Rate (ft/man-day) 1,500Shredding Labor Rate (S/man-day) $199.09Shredder Use (days) 3Shredder Cost $192.24
Subtotal Pipeline Shredding Costs $789.51
Table P.1-8 Marsland Miscellaneous Site Reclamation - 2013 Surety Estimate, Continued
C. Pipeline Transportation and Disposal (NRC-Licensed Facility)Pipe Diameter (inches) 4Chipped Volume Reduction (ft'/ft) 0.0103Subtotal Volume of Shredded PVC Pipe (yd') 1.5Disposal Void Factor 1.25Final Disposal Volume (yd3) 1.88Transportation and Disposal Unit Cost ($/yd&) (Unpackaged Bulk) $221.64
3uuotuai ripenne oisposau Losts $416.68Total Wastewater Pipeline Reclamation Costs $100,794.79
11. Electrical Distribution System RemovalAssumptions
Length of High Voltage Lines 500High Voltage Line Removal Rate ($/ft.) $2.17High Voltage Line Removal Cost (S/ft.) $1,085.003uosLaLion memovai S1.175.00
Subtotal Electrical Distribution System Removal Costs $2,260.00
IV. Supervisory Labor Costs During Miscellaneous ReclamationEstimated Duration (months) 3Engineer Rate ($/month) $8,042.77Total Engineer Labor $24,128.31Radiation Technician Rate ($/month) $4,553.62Total Radiation Technician Labor $13,660.86
Total Supervisory Labor Costs $37,789.17
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS RECLAMATION COSTS $142,493.18Sch = Schedule
Revised 6/11/2013
Table P.1-9 Marsland Deep Disposal Well Reclamation - 2013 Surety Estimate
I. Cost Basis
A. Plugging and Abandonment
Cost Estimate from April 2009 2nd Well Permit Application for plugging and abandonment $60,292
April 2009 CPI 213.2
June 2011 CPI 229.5
Subtotal Escalated April 2009 Plugging and Abandonment Costs $64,901.57
B. Site Reclamation
Cost Estimate from April 2009 2nd Well Permit Application for site reclamation $2,500
April 2009 CPI 213.2
June 2011 CPI 229.5
Subtotal Escalated April 2009 Reclamation Costs $2,691.14
Subtotal Abandonment cost per well $67,592.71
TOTAL DEEP DISPOSAL WELL RECLAMATION COSTS $67,592.71CPI: Consumer Price Index
Revised 6/11/2013
Table P.1-10 Marsland Groundwater IX Treatment (GIX) Restoration (Unit Costs) - 2013 Surety Estimate
Assumptions:I. All pumps are 5 hp pumping at 32 gpmn
2. Cost of electricity =3. Horsepower to kilowatt conversion =4. Operator labor costs =5. Labor costs are based on 36 pumps at 1,150 gpm
Wellfield Pumping Electrical Costs per 1000 Gallons (Includes bleed to the Deepwvell / Evaporation Pond)1000 gal X 5 hp X I hr X 0.746 kwh X $ 0.0830
32 gpm 60 rain hp kwh
$0.0830 Kw hr0.746 Kw/HP
$199.09 man-day
Wellfield Pumping Labor Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X I ain X man-day X
1150 gal 1440 mmin
=$ 0.161
=$ $0.240$199.09
man-day2 operatorsx
Groundwater IX Production Rate1000 gal X 60 rain X
nin hr24 hr
dayX 365 day x
year112
yearmonth
43,800,000 gallonsmonth
TOTAL GWS COSTS PER 1000 GALLONS = $ 0.40
Revised 6/11/20 13
Table P.1-1l Marsland Groundwater Reverse Osmosis (RO) Treatment (Unit Costs) - 2013 Surety Estimate
Assumptions:I. All purnps are 5 lip pumping at 32 gpm2 Membrane Replacement3 Cost of electricity =4 Horsepower to kilowatt conversion =
5 Operator labor costs =6 RO System horsepower requirements for 600 gpm rated llowv based upon:
RO Unit PumpPermeate/Injection pumpWaste purnp (lI(Bleed - Deepwell / Evap Ponds)TOTAL:
7 Chemical costs:ReduIctant =
Antiscalant
$0.015 per 1000 gal$0.0830 Kw hr
0.746 Kw/IHP$199.09 man-day
195 lip60 hp12 hp
267 lip
$0.240 lb$15.45 gal
Membrane Replacement Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X $660 membrane
cost / mont1Ih
Wellfield IPumping Electrical Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X 5 lhp
32 gpin
Reverse Osmosis Electrical Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X 267 lip
600 gpni
Reverse Osmosis Labor Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal I rnin
X 600 gal
/ 43,800,000 gallonslmonth1
I hr60 riin
I hr60 rain
0.746 kwh $ 0.0830x hp kwh
0.746 kwh $ 0.08301hlp kwh
=$ 0.015
=$ 0.161
= $ 0.459
per Kgal
per Kgal
per Kgal
per Kgal
per Kgal
per Kgal
I man-day $199.091440 rnin man-day
"2 operators = $ $0.461
Treatment chemical costs per 1000 GallonsAntiscalant:
1000 gal X 0.000008330 gal antiscalant, ga x $15.45I gal
Reductant:1000 gal X 0.001040 lbs reductant
I gal
gal antiscalant
x $0240lb reductant
=$ $0.129
$ $0250
Reverse Osmosis production Rate1000 gal X
ittn60 rain
hr x24 hr X 365 day
day yearx I year
12 month43.800,000 gallons
111o01th
TOTAL RO COSTS PER 1000 GALLONS = 1.48RO = Re\'rse Usmosis
Revised 6/111/201
Table P.1-12 Marsland Groundwater Recirculation (Unit Costs) - 2013 Surety Estimate
Assumptions:1. All pumps are 5 lip pumping at 32 gpm2. Cost of electricity =3. Horsepower to kilowalt conversion4. Operator labor costs =5. System horsepower requirements for 1, 150 gpmn rated flow based upon:
injection pump
$0.0830 Kw hr0.746 Kw/HIP
$199.09 man-day
30 lip
Wellfield Pumping Electrical Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X lip
32 gpni
Wellfield Injection Electrical Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X 30 lip
1150 gpm
Recirculation Labor Costs per 1000 Gallons1000 gal X I mII
1150 gal
1 hr60 min
1 hr60 m1i
I man-dayX 1440 maiM
24 hrday
0.746 kwvh $ 0.0830lhp kwh
0.746 kwvhi $ 0.0830lip kwh
= 0.161 per Kgal
= 0.027 per Kgal
= $ 0.120 per Kgal$199.09man-day
I operators
Recirculation Production Rate1150 gal X
min60 ain
hr365 day X
yearI year12 month
50.370,000 gallonsmonth
TOTAL RECIRCULATION COSTS PER 1000 GALLONS = S 0.31Revised 6/11/2013
Table P.1-13 Marsland Well Abandonment (Unit Costs) - 2013 Surety Estimate
Assumptions:I Use backhoe for 0.25 hr/well to dig, cut off, and cap well.2 Drill rig used 2.5 hrs to plug well.3 Labor for installing chips, etc. will require 2 workers at 0.5 hrs per well
Well Abandonment Costs Cost per ft (based on 700 ft wells)
Labor Costs I hours X $ 24.89 per hour =$ 24.89 $0.0356
Cat 416 Backhoe0.25 hours X $ 122.98 per hour =$ 30.75 $0.0439
Drill rig2.5 hours
Well Cap I each
Materials per foot of well (Variable Cost)Cement 0.0714 lbs/ftBentonite Chips 0.007 tubes/ft
Plug Gel 0.0086 sacks/ft
Total Estimated Cost per Foot:Revised 6/11/2013
163.34
12.20
per hour
each
per poundper tube
per sack
=$ 408.35
=$ 12.20
0.1408.50
8.50
$0.5834
$0.0174
$0.0100$0.0595
$0.073 1
$0.82
Table P.1-14 Marsland Five Year Mechanical Integrity Tests (MIT)
Assumptions:
1 Pulling Unit for 8 hr/day
2 MIT Unit for 8 hr/day
3 Labor for operation of pulling unit requires 2 workers ( one operator & one laborer)
4 Labor for operation of MJIT Unit requires I worker
MIT Costs per Well
Equipment and Labor:
Pulling Unit includes one operator
8 hours X $ 22.63 per hour -$ 181.04
Laborer
8 hours X $ 24.89 per hour =$ 199.12
MITT Unit includes one operator
8 hours X $ 22.63 per hour =$ 181.00
TOTAL MIT COST PER DAY =S 561.16
Wells Completed 6 per day
MIT COSTS PER WELL =S 93.53
MIT COSTS PER DEEP DISPOSAL WELL (2013 Cost) =$ 6425Revised 6/11/2013
Table P.1-15 NIarsland Master Cost Basis - 2013 Surety EstimateNuLlI NII2 NIU3 N1U4 1%115 MU6 N1L17 MU18 5IU9 NUIO NI I1-)
Total number oflproduction wolls
Total numbrer of injection wells
Total number of shallow monitor we lls
Total number of perimeter monitor wells
Totl numtlber of restoration , ells
Welfitld Area 1012)Wellield Area (acres)
Allfcted Ore Zone Area M12)Avg. Completed 11ickness
Porosity
Afflicted Volume (113)Flare Factor
Kgallons per Pore Volume
Number of Patterns il Unitrst
Number of Wells i Unit(s)
Production Wells
hrjcetino Wells
Shallo- Mslonitot Wells
Perinteter Monritor Wells
Nttbr of Wells per WeltfieldTotal Number of Wells
Average Well Dpthl (Rl - Deep Wells
Asgerse Well Dptlh (1il - Shallo-s Wells
120l2100
14
IIllt
5.11)15,42.000
13.I05SH,m)(1)
19.6
02911.524.8101)
1.2
1201211
0110)
D)
II
0
1)
I)11.(11)1
19.6
0.29
1.2
UI
01.001
(I
19.6,019.'
0I
1.21)
0I
0I0I
(I
0I0I
0t0I
4)
01.001
0I
19.610.29
0I
1.2It
0IIt
II
II
II
1)0I0I
I00
0I0I
I)
0(I0I
0II-I
II
1)111111
1)
11.60.29
I.)1.2
11
0I01101
0
191.601.29
1)
1.21)
NoII*.
01291)
1.2
1)
1;01.001
(I
19.
10.290I
1.2
0
150
11.2
I.2
II
0.29
120l
(0010
1)(1.1l)1
11.29
1.2
CurrentEstimated next report
Total Estimated
Current
Estimated next report
Total Estimated
Current
Estimated next report
Total Estijated
Current
Eslimated next reportTotal Estimated
Currenst
Estitnated text reportTotal Estimated
01211
1201
20112{111
1)I)IF
O
I)
1)
1)00
00(I
0
0
0
0
(I
0
(I
0I
0
0
0
0
00
0I1414
II
I)
0
0
0
0
0
000
II
0)0
0
It
II0
0
1)
0
DI
0I
0I
0pI
(I
{I
It
(I
00I
0II0It
345
349
I)l)I)
II
1100 11 [(lo 1100 I l1l 11 011 110 I1 U 11 011 111M) I 100 t
41)0 40U 4010 4111) 400 4001 4111 40110 4010 0
Table P.1-I5 Marsiand NIaster Cost Basis - 2013 Surety Estimate (continted)
Electrical Costs CPI Escalators (CPI-tl. UtS. City Average)
Pin-r cost adji fitr current actual cost)
Kileoatt tw Ilursepasvet
I lorscpolser per gallon per titilate
2012 Rate 201 3 cr Rate
$0.11797 $0.0t30t
0.746 0.746
It 167 0.167
wiltr
I-IP/gpnr
19189 CPI (average) 118.3June 2012 CPI (deep well estitate) 213.2
2011 CPt (June 2011 used in last 225.7
Current CPI (June 20111 229.5
21)12 Escalation Factor 1 117Labor |tales
2,,12 Rate 21013 cEst Rate (CPI
Operator Labor Cost $193.76 $1991109 dca
Pulling Unit Operator $179.00 S1 181.03 day
Engineer Cost $7.,98.33 $8.0142.77 uondl
Radiation Technician Costs $4,477 50 $4,553.62 nthttl
Chermical Costs
2(t 12 Rate 201(3 Est Rote
Aoliscalant for RO tadi for currelt actual cost) $15.45 $15.45 gal
Reductant (adj for current actual cost) $11.24 $0.24 lb
Cement (adi for currcnt actual cost) $1.14 S10.14 pound
Benronite loubes (ad) for current actual cost) $6.35 S) 510 tube
Salt adj for current actual cost) $128.52 $128 52 ten
Plug Gel (ad) for current actual cost) $6.411 S 50 sack
Well Cap ladp for current actual cost) $12 011 $ 12.201 each
I lsdroehloric Acid tladl fbr current actual cost) $1.54 $1.54 gallon
Analytical Costs
Guideline 6 (contract lab adiustcd for currelt contract cost) $248 0l $249.00 aatrlsis
b paratncter (in-house) Est Rate (CPIl 50.110 $51.85 an- sis
Other (radon. hio, tec.) Est Ritec CPI) $9231.00 $940.73 totlt
Spurn Parts
2012 Rate 1l03 Es2 Rat9 s(PI$5 1.750.,00 S52.629 75 .,carRestoration spare pans esttlnate
Table P.1-15 Marsland Master Cosl Basis - 2013 Surely Estimate (continued)Bossittosrst Costs
loots er!Rottal Labor Costs Rltnit Reserte Costs Fuel Costs Mob & Dettob Total IStir
Rate 1IS/t) So 010o Mlltr
Cat 2124G Loader
Cat 416 Backhoe
ShredderCat DON Bulldezer
Pulling Unit
Mitetng Unit
Drill Rig
$36.50t $24.89
$21.Stt $24.8)$8.01
$1I tt.0t $24.09
$52.58 ine
$163 34 tc
$64 50 $1209
incS330.00 $44.85
inc unc
ilnc i11¢
inc
inc
inc
in,
in,
$1$42.59
$122.98$0 Ill
$S509 74
$52.50
$6.t10
$16334
Basis:Drill rig based on current 2011 contract.
Equiptent rates based on Cost Reference Guide - Equipoteot Watch 2tt12 updated additiOiL.
Aug 12 costs for off-road fitel. $3 '4S1) gallot
Labor rate based on currctt operator labor rate
Pip V'olomns
ttttn l Pttte Sine W all T htlkt-tenso D rNoLinal Pitte Dittt Illn/l1t
3/8-ioch 02 bose 0.37553 0.03 1310
2-melh Sch. 40 dohole 0 15 4i00 2 375tt0 0,01t740
1-1/4-1elt SchtI.4tt stng.I I 0.14000 I66t 000440
2-tch SDR 13.3 inj & prod. (I. 14815 2.29h3tt (tO00tt0
4-Inch SDR 35 0 114310 4 22960 t0.I1t30t-inch Sch. d4t process pipe 0I.28lt110 6.560tt0 0t.03840
6-incht Tronklino 0.49it100 56t60,0tt (1t0s6ll
8-tnch Ttonkline (I 63900(I t.54xtt 0 11030
It-htch Trunkline 0t.79600 1 .654110 0.17120
12-inch Trunklttc ( Y94400I 12 6357010 0I 240t4
Table P.1-15 Marsland Master Cost Basis - 2013 Surety Estimate (continuced)Pipe 11omovl icd Shredding Conis
Aecicice Rcnno'al Race (Iltman- Shreddin- Race Labor Rare (da Aeci icr CarlAan A,(•lhcrar-dar
2-inch SDR 13.5 inj & prod Remoral 225 $1119.9 S0.88
2-inch StDR 13.5 inj & Prod Shredding 1920) $199.019 $11.1)
Trunklinc Rcnoval I ()O $191113 s I.1`9
T.rcoline Shredding 1WO $199.119 $1.99
Doiclcolc Pipe Remooal 201)10 $S199.09 $9.10
Doerhole Pipe Shredding 225) $1991.01 $(}.1
Doar nhole tose Reina'al ... I10 $199 (11) $0.201
Whasce and RO Boinding Pipeline Remrnal 1i7 $199 011 $2.97
Waste ad RO Building Pipeline Shredding 1500 $S199019 $01.13
Waste Disposal Costs
Dlernic Tarnal
Waste Fanri Fee Falctrr Fee iier Cubic Yard Transpnn Con TrclcorationFavr ard Disnpn...l
Soil, Bell Brproducl Malerial SIM6 75 per Ton 11.54 $9115 $6I00 111 per Yd3 $25 0i5 per, d3
trnpackaged Bulk Bepreducl Matrial leg., pipe. equipanal) $141.75 perTonr 0.42 $61.64 SIbt) II) per Yd3 S221.64 per Yd3
Solid Waste (landfill) $(0.03 per Lb Incl. per Lb $I.(13111111 per Lb
Solid Wsade (lndcfill) $912.011 per Lead Inel. per Load $912 0l) per Load
Void Faccor fbr disposal) 1.25
Plant Dismconling
Plamr Cowon.ents... Nculer Unitics Esated Dislosad Units AciMIrr Unirs 2012CastVolun¢ -
Cantrariinared Tanrks I each 19.23 F3 eacci cSnnn-.onc o.',. 190811"0rlecd,.11,ei-c lciar-Unr(nnlcanclccaced Tieler II eachc 9..3 Fc3 cachc m..u 9. cc4l)(r
Piuotps I3 each 5 Ec3 caclcDanho.,loe PU.npr 0 each O..S F3 eacc 'n-c"rc'a.. Cnrrentc Coar $S/112 14 04
Containinated Piping 40001(1 feel See estincate by piping size and
Unccecccanccnared Piping 9 feel noaterial
filhrs 0r each 1li0 FO3 each
Diner 0 each 4001 Fc3 eaeb
A% erge PVC Pipe Diarncer (inclcs)c3
Table P.1-15 Marsland Master Cost Basis - 2013 Surety Estimate (continued)Plat D)eoM.ta.mitfatiocn
Diruct Disirose Plant Fleer Area
UncontamlnaLed Plant Floor Area
Decontaminated Plant Floor Area
A•lemgc concrcte thickness
Plant Wall Area
134tttt Rt2
90111tI 112ut 75 tI
Dacon Solution 11('1) Fluor Application Rate
Decon Solution (MICI) Wall Application Rate
2 g.al1I1
i gal/IC2
Crow Butte Resources
Marsland Project
Page 1 of 2
April 23, 2012
Rhonda Grantham
Supervisor Radiation Safety & Regulatory Affairs/RSO
86 Crow Butte Rd
Crawford, NE 69339
Subject: United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) Regulatory Guide 4.14 Lower
Limits of Detection for the Marsland Baseline Samples.
Dear Rhonda:
As requested in conversation with David Blaida, Energy Laboratories, Inc. (ELI) Radiochemical
Supervisor on April 20, 2012, the following is an explanation verifying the reported Minimum
Detectable Concentrations/Lower Limits of Detection (MDC/LLD) values for the Marsland Baseline
Project samples are in compliance with the USNRC regulatory guide 4.14, Section 5 “LLD” for the
following requested analytes:
Analyte MDC/LLD MDC/LLD Matrix Water Water
Radium 226 2E-10 uCi/ml 0.2 pCi/L
Thorium 230 2E-10 uCi/ml 0.2 pCi/L
Polonium 210 1E-9 uCi/ml 1.0 pCi/L
Lead 210 1E-9 uCi/ml 1.0 pCi/L
Uranium 2E-10 uCi/ml 0.2 pCi/L
Matrix Soil/sediment (dry) Soil/sediment (dry)
Radium 226 2E-7 uCi/g 0.2 pCi/g
Thorium 230 2E-7 uCi/g 0.2 pCi/g
Polonium 210 No guidance No guidance
Lead 210 2E-7 uCi/g 0.2 pCi/g
Uranium 2E-7 uCi/g 0.2 pCi/g
Matrix Vegetation, food &
Fish (wet)
Vegetation, food &
Fish (wet)
Radium 226 5E-8 uCi/kg 0.05 pCi/g
Thorium 230 2E-7 uCi/kg 0.2 pCi/g
Polonium 210 1E-6 uCi/kg 1.0 pCi/g
Lead 210 1E-6 uCi/kg 1.0 pCi/g
Uranium 2E-7 uCi/kg 0.2 pCi/g
ELI has met the criteria per the guidance suggested by the USNRC when reasonably achievable by available conventional laboratory methodology. If for some reason the MDC/LLD was not be met on the original analysis, the samples were recounted or re-analyzed until the 4.14 MDC/LLDs were achieved. If after
Page 1 of 2
Crow Butte Resources
Marsland Project
Page 2 of 2 reanalysis these criteria still could not be met, the laboratory report included a narrative explanation with respect to one or more of the following:
1. Matrix interferences
2. Matrix effects
3. Inadequate sample volumes
4. Radiochemical concentrations were reported above the MDC/LLD
In addition, some of the analytes were reported to two significant figures. Regulatory Guide, 4.14
lists the LLDs to only one significant figure, therefore, it is of ELI’s opinion that these should be
rounded to the nearest significant figure. For example, 1.3 pCi/L equals 1 pCi/L.
Also, as mutually agreed, the concept of MDC vs. LLD is effectively a “non-issue” in that each
calculation is slightly different but clearly generates identical sets of results.
Hopefully this is an adequate explanation of the issues as it pertains to the Marsland Expansion Area.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Dave Blaida or me.
Thank you,
Steve Dobos
Senior Project manager/Client Relations
Page 2 of 2
Thank you, Digitally signed bySteve DobosDate: 2012.04.25 15:21:29 -06:00
